Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

CT7567

Members
  • Content Count

    280
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

262 Excellent

About CT7567

  • Rank
    Established Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    USA

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Well, if there is no such aftermarket set then it's hard to consider it "cheaper" To be fair, Hasegawa's Navy Phantoms may be more readily available and/or cheaper in the U.S. than other parts of the world, but despite being 30 years old they are still the best kits available for most Phantom variants. Best of luck on your quest for Unobtanium
  2. Ok, like I said then - the issue isn't a need for aftermarket, it's Hasegawa not releasing enough slatted F-4Es. Assuming you've already got the Kais in your stash, one workaround is buying a Hasegawa F-4S to build as a J, swapping the slatted outboard wings (same as the F-4E parts) with the unslatted ones from your F-4EJ kit. All "thick wing" Hasegawa Phantoms include the inboard actuators.
  3. The B-2 from what I've seen is very good - certainly an improvement on the vintage Testors kit. I was hoping for better on the B-52, but their research team clearly let them down by confusing variants and getting some shapes plain wrong. Since the changes over time to the B-1B are less dramatic than the BUFF I'm hoping they won't have any major snafus.
  4. Is this really the case? Slatted wings were used on late F-4Es, Fs, Gs, and a limited number of RF-4Es, plus (in a slightly varied form) the F-4S. With exception of the RF-4E, all of the available kits of these variants in 1/72 include the appropriate wing parts, typically the actuator fairings for the inboard sections and separate outboard sections with the fixed slats molded integrally. If you're looking to convert an unslatted early F-4E/F-4EJ, that's fine but the issue isn't a lack of aftermarket conversion, you just need a different kit (or the right combination of spares). If what you're asking about is a *deployed* inboard slat, I think this has been done in the past (possibly by Paragon?) but the demand must be limited since the Phantom's inboard slats were mechanically operated and typically closed on the ground (vs. aerodynamically driven slats on types like the A-4 or slatted F-86, where the slats normally "droop" due to gravity).
  5. +1 on the hope for an accurate new-tooled B-1B in the One True Scale. The "future release" is still on Modelcollect's website, but I've not heard anything recently on the timeframe for its release. After the debacle their B-52s turned out to be, I can only hope they take extra care to get the B-1 right.
  6. Hate to have missed this before the model was complete, but the B-1B camouflage (referred to semi-officially as the "Strategic" scheme) actually consists of three colors: the upper surfaces are FS34086 dark green and FS36081 dark gray, with the undersides in a similar disruptive pattern of FS36081 and FS36118 (aka "Gunship Gray"). FS36081, sometimes referred to as "Euro I gray" has a strange, greenish cast in some lighting (and after fading), but is also sometimes (inaccurately) called "dark gunship gray" - which explains your confusion, and probably accounts for the discrepancies you mentioned in trying to correlate the upper and lower patterns. Posting this mainly so others can avoid the same issue - don't take it as a criticism of a very nice build of a tricky little model.
  7. Technically speaking, there has been a Gazelle released in 1/32 scale. Albeit a somewhat... unique, ahem, "variant."
  8. My understanding is that there is no "universal" rule for the period from end of WWII to 1953 for U.S. aircraft cockpit colors. In general, postwar green was replaced by black for cockpit interiors, but I'm not certain when/if this was officially codified and it was certainly not an absolute rule. In 1953, FS36231 - known informally as Dark Gull Gray - was adopted by the USAF and USN as the new standard cockpit color. I'm sure there are again exceptions, but for the most part this has been the standard U.S. interior color up to the present day.
  9. This is correct, although there may be some subtle differences in tooling (mainly added detail parts) between various releases by both manufacturers. (Note Scalemates doesn't list the Revell boxings under the Italeri kit's history, but you can see from the sprue layouts they are the same kit).
  10. Assuming you mean the pre-breakup Yugoslav AF, yes, their MiG-29s wore the "standard" camouflage colors. If you don't already have references, a Google image search for "MiG-29 Yugoslavia" or similar should turn up plenty of photos to give you a better idea the colors you want to duplicate. This site has drawings that can help with the camo pattern as well as info on the history of individual Fulcrums in Yugoslav service: Ygoslav MiG-29 Reference
  11. Bearing in mind the MiG-29 usually shows a lot of variation in weathering on top of the "standard" camouflage scheme, your Tamiya choices look generally OK but you may want to lighten the XF22 for less contrast with the base gray color. You didn't mention which nation, much less specific airframe, you may be trying to model, and that will always be a question where paint selections are concerned: what is your refetence? In general if Tamiya paints work well for you there's no reason to change unless you dislike mixing and need to match certain color standards that Tamiya doesn't match "straight from the bottle." For example, if you plan to build a lot off postwar U.S. jets, you'll probably want to find a paint line that includes matches for the commonly used FS595 colors. Frankly, you'll almost always end up doing a project needing some color that requires a custom mix or using compatible paint from another manufacturer, so color selections are still a secondary concern after factors such as availability and ease of use.
  12. Thanks for sharing this fantastic build, triumphs and tragedies included. I hope you're able to regain your mojo for this project, it would be a shame to have come so far and be stymied by something comparatively small but crucial such as the mounting hardware. I don't know if you're active on any other modeling forums, but this build and your An-225 would both be of great interest to the Real Space sections at ARC (public to view) and Starship Modeler (registration required). All due respect to the Britmodeller citizery, both of those sites seem to have a more active participation from the "Space Force" and I feel sure they would be both encouraging and helpful for your ongoing builds. ARC Forums - Real Space Discussion Starship Modeler - Real Space Discussions Hope to see more of your progress on this and other projects soon!
  13. CT7567

    F-104 question

    Rob, as long as you don't have any involuntary arm salutations, I think you're fine The U.S. military tends to only be "open" about nuclear capabilities when it's in the country's best (deterrent) interest. When it's politically more expedient, you tend to hear the "Glomar response": neither confirm, nor deny.
  14. The Zvezda kit isn't scheduled for released until sometime around the end of this year, and there's no possible way to know how long after that before you could actually have one in hand. That said, based on the 3D CAD models published thus far it should improve on the most obvious faults of the existing competitors (engine inaccuracies, lack of "crease" at the floor line, etc), but it'll be some months yet before anyone can say for certain that it's a better kit, and if so by how much. That being said, the Italeri kit isn't terrible, and is even available in a Combat Talon boxing (if you don't already have the Flightpath conversion). Being a somewhat older kit, Italeri's vanilla transport boxings should be readily available for a competitive price. You also have the benefit of numerous previous builds and reviews to document the shortcomings and give you an idea which, if any, you may feel a need to correct. Assuming you're referring to the "3M Blackbird" scheme, my understanding is the colors are black and a green close to FS34159. Not sure of a gray underside color, as I've only seen confirmed documentation of the two-tone scheme.
  15. Pretty sure the same is true for the "famous because there's a kit" NKC-135A laser lab. There's a method, but its still madness
×
×
  • Create New...